Matthew O’Donnell
15 September 2012
Philosophy 203, Section 010
Kant AssignmentImmanuel Kant’s Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals starts off by saying there is only one thing that is good without qualification which is a good will. Something can only be good if it is well-matched with a good will. In fact, “a good will is” according to him, “is good not because of what it effects or accomplishes, nor because of its fitness to attain some proposed end; it is good only through its willing i.e., it is good in itself” (7). He states that these specific obligations of a good will are called duties and then makes three propositions about them. Kant then says that “I should never act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law” (14). This is saying one should act in a way that everyone could act. By following Kant’s definition of duty, motives of duty, and the three propositions it proves that this argument is valid and correct, but has a major flaw. Kant assigns general duties that we must follow. He says, “we shall take up the concept of duty though with certain subjective restrictions and hindrances rather bring it out by contrast and make it shine forth more brightly” (9). He divides the word duty into perfect and imperfect duties. Perfect duties, or “pure” (2) duties, are such things as do not murder or do not steal. Imperfect duties could be something like helping another in need. He then goes on to say that perfect duties never conflict with one another. Next that if a perfect and an imperfect duty coincide then one must act from the perfect duty. An example of this would be if to help another one would have to commit murder, then one must follow the perfect duty and not kill. This also means one would not help the other too. Lastly if the conflict is between two imperfect duties then one can choose between the two according to their own discretion. The process for defining ones duty is by looking at the...

YOU MAY ALSO FIND THESE DOCUMENTS HELPFUL

...In his publication, Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant supplies his readers with a thesis that claims morality can be derived from the principle of the categorical imperative. The strongest argument to support his thesis is the difference between actions in accordance with duty and actions in accordance from duty. To setup his thesis, Kant first draws a distinction between empirical and "a priori" concepts. Empirical concepts are ideas we reach from our experiences in the world. On the other hand and in contrast, "a priori" concepts are ideas we reach as an end point of reasoning prior to or apart from any experience of how things occur in the world. Kant then claims that moral actions are supposed done for the reason of morality alone. This train of thought leads to the conclusion that an understanding of morality must be based on "a priori" concepts of reason. Truly moral ideas are then universally valid if and only if they are based on "a priori" concepts.
From this idea of "a priori" concepts, Kant begins his thesis with the notion that the only thing in the world that is a qualified good is the "good will", even if its efforts bring about a not necessarily good result. A "good will" is good because of the willing that is involved. Two main implications arise with this idea of the "good will". The first implication is moral actions cannot have impure...

...Ethics 1010-027
4/1/13
Essay Assignment #2
Kant: Grounding for Metaphysics and MoralsImmanuel Kant states that the only thing in this world that is “good without qualification” is the good will. He states the attributes of character such as intelligence, wit, and judgment are considered good but can be used for the wrong reasons. Kant also states that the attributes of good fortune such as health, power, riches, honor, that provide one happiness can also be used in the wrong way (7). In order to understand Kant’s view of moral rightness, one must understand that only a good will is unambiguously good without qualification, it is “good in itself”. To clarify, Kant states that “a good will is good not because of what it effects or accomplishes, nor because of its fitness to attain some proposed end; it is good only through its willing, i.e. it is good in itself” (7). To Kant, a good will is the only thing that gives action moral worth. Human beings were granted with reason not only to attain self-preservation and a state of happiness, but “its true function must be to produce a will which is not merely good as a mean to some further end, but it good in itself” (9). Human beings are called to exercise reason through duty to bring a universal good to all. This duty, living according to our highest reason, must be exercised through action that is beneficial and...

...Kant's Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Moral
The central concept of Kant's Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of
Morals is the categorical imperative. "The conception of an objective principle,
in so far as it is obligatory for a will, is called a command (of reason), and
the formula of the command is called an Imperative." (Abbott, 30) An imperative
is something that a will ought or shall do because the will is obligated to act
in the manner in which it conforms with moral law. The categorical imperative
is an obligation by the will to act so that the action can be classified as a
universal law. When one acts in conformity with the universal law at all times,
they are following out the categorical imperative. This differs from the
hypothetical imperative in that the hypothetical imperative acts on the basis
that the will in the end will gain something (not a means to an end). The
categorical imperative is a means to an end, and the action to obtain the end
must have moral worth. Stipulations of the categorical imperative are that all
actions should act only on the maxim, that actions have moral worth, and the end
is necessary. From these stipulations, it can be derived that the categorical
imperative should be followed in order to live morally. "If an action is
conceived as good in itself and consequently as...

...Kant argued that moral requirements are based on a standard of rationality he dubbed the "Categorical Imperative" (CI). Immorality thus involves a violation of the CI and is thereby irrational. This argument was based on his striking doctrine that a rational will must be regarded as autonomous, or free in the sense of being the author of the law that binds it.
The fundamental principle of morality  the CI  is none other than this law of an autonomous will. Thus, at the heart of Kant'smoral philosophy is a conception of reason whose reach in practical affairs goes well beyond that of a Humean slave' to the passions. Moreover, it is the presence of this self-governing reason in each person that Kant thought offered decisive grounds for viewing each as possessed of equal worth and deserving of equal respect.
In Kant's terms, a good will is a will whose decisions are wholly determined by moral demands or as he refers to this, by the Moral Law
Kant's analysis of commonsense ideas begins with the thought that the only thing good without qualification is a good will'.
While the phrases he's good hearted', she's good natured' and she means well' are common, the good will' as Kant thinks of it is not the same as any of these ordinary notions. The idea of a good will is closer to the idea of a good person', or, more archaically, a person of good will'
The...

...Preface
The foundation of the metaphysics of morals is a critical examination of a pure practical reason.
The present foundations is the search for and establishment of the supreme principle of morality.
Method: analytically from common knowledge to the determination of its supreme principle; then , synthetically from the examination of this principle and its sources back to common knowledge.
Division:
1. the common rational knowledge ofmorals -> the philosophical rational knowledge of morals
2. the popular moral philosophy -> the metaphysics of morals
3. the metaphysics of morals -> the critical examination of pure practical reason (its foundation)
.transition from the common rational knowledge of morals to the philosophical
（一）a good will: good without qualification
 gifts of nature:
talents of mind: intelligence, wit, judgment
qualities of temperament: courage, resoluteness, perseverance
If the will ( which is to make use of them) is not good, they can become bad.
 gifts of fortune:
power, riches, honor, health, well-being, contentment(happiness)
A good will is needed to correct their influence on the mind.
Thus, the good will seems to constitute the indispensible condition of the worthiness to be happy.
 some qualities:
moderation in emotions and passions, self-control, calm deliberation
They...

...Sidra M
Kant’smoral theory
Immanuel Kant (22 April 1724 – 12 February 1804) was a German philosopher from Kaliningrad, Russia who researched, lectured and wrote on philosophy and anthropology during the Enlightenment at the end of the 18th century.
According to Kant, human beings occupy a special place in creation, and morality can be summed up in one ultimate commandment of reason, or imperative, from which all duties and obligations derive. He defined an imperative as any proposition that declares a certain action (or inaction) to be necessary. There are two types of imperatives introduced by Kant. 1) Hypothetical imperative and 2) Categorical imperative.
Hypothetical imperatives apply to someone dependent on them having certain ends for example: if I wish to quench my thirst, I must drink something; if I wish to acquire knowledge, I must learn.
A categorical imperative, on the other hand, denotes an absolute, unconditional requirement that asserts its authority in all circumstances, both required and justified as an end in itself. It is best known in its first formulation:
Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law. The second form explains that always treat humanity, whether in your own person or that of another, never simply as a means but always at the same time as an end.
The categorical imperative is the central philosophical concept in...

...APPLICATION OF THE SUPREME PRINCIPLE OF MORALITY OF
Immanuel Kant
IN THE DECISIONS WE TAKE IN EVERYDAY LIFE
If a billionaire were to leave behind all his fortune but makes a dying request to donate $1 million to his favourite football team when the same can be used for a better cause, what would one do?
Donating it to charity would seem like the right thing to do, but the answer to it, according to Kant would be quite the opposite. Here, it’s not the consequences that determine the rightness of an action. Rightness is in accordance with morality.
According to ImmanuelKant’s views, a supreme moral principle must entail an absolute necessity and should be done out of duty. He believes that, only actions that emanate out of a sense of duty are moral actions and any act performed keeping one’s own self-interest in mind are, regarded as actions that are not born...

...ImmanuelKant's Ethics Of Pure Duty
In Comparison To
John Stuart Mill's Utilitarian Ethics Of Justice
Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill are philosophers who addressed the issues of morality in terms of how moral traditions are formed. Immanuel Kant has presented one viewpoint in The Grounding For The Metaphysics of Morals that is founded on his belief that the worth of man is inherent in his ability to reason. John Stuart Mill holds another opinion as presented in the book, Utilitarianism that is seemingly in contention with the thoughts of Kant. What is most distinctive about the ethics of morality is the idea of responsibilities to particular individuals. According to Kant and Mill, moral obligations are not fundamentally particularistic in this way because they are rooted in universal moral principles. Mill and Kant are both philosophers whom have made great impact on their particular fields of philosophy and a critique of their theories in relation to each other may help develop a better understanding to them and their theories individually.
Mill's utilitarianism theory is a version of the ideal judgment theory. So is Kant's, but there are differences. Mill holds an empiricist theory while Kant holds a rationalist theory. Kant grounds morality in forms that he believes, are necessary to free and...